According to the 8th circuit...it is. The article is a little ambiguous. My guess is that it is only against the law if an officer tells you to stop and you continue to record. I'm sure this will be revisited by the SCOTUS. I don't see it holding up to be honest, especially if it's in a public place. I would like to see some officer safety considerations though...such as allowing an officer to inspect the phone/camera before allowing the person to continue recording. There have been numerous documented cases of makeshift "zip gun" cell phones that have been seized by police. If you are aiming something at me I think it's reasonable to make sure it's not a weapon before allowing the person to continue.

According to the 8th circuit...it is. The article is a little ambiguous. My guess is that it is only against the law if an officer tells you to stop and you continue to record. I'm sure this will be revisited by the SCOTUS. I don't see it holding up to be honest, especially if it's in a public place. I would like to see some officer safety considerations though...such as allowing an officer to inspect the phone/camera before allowing the person to continue recording. There have been numerous documented cases of makeshift "zip gun" cell phones that have been seized by police. If you are aiming something at me I think it's reasonable to make sure it's not a weapon before allowing the person to continue.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I'd like to think there could be compromises made. There is a lot of footage that captures incidents that some officers would not like to be seen.

You can record me all you want, but your gonna do it at a distance I'm comfortable with. Failure to follow that order could result in an arrest for obstruction.

I personally have zero problems with video recording. It's the occasional a-hole that thinks he has the right to be in your face while your doing your job that makes things or situations more difficult. We're famous on Facebook Live all the time, lol.

You can record me all you want, but your gonna do it at a distance I'm comfortable with. Failure to follow that order could result in an arrest for obstruction.

I personally have zero problems with video recording. It's the occasional a-hole that thinks he has the right to be in your face while your doing your job that makes things or situations more difficult. We're famous on Facebook Live all the time, lol.

Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%. I have zero issues with being recorded while I do my job, but if you are recording, you will NOT be in a position to be an interference or distraction to me.

Honestly being on camera isn't a big deal anymore. I'm on camera for almost my entire tour. The only time I take my body cam off is to take a dump or a leak, other than that it's on me all the time. The minute the lights come on, the cruiser's MVR is on. I think a few years ago people thought that aiming a camera at a cop was going to piss them off (which it did many times). Now it's just another camera focusing on me other than the other two that are already on me. As the others have said though...don't think you are going to walk up to me and stick the phone a foot away from my face without some kind of repercussions. Police have "personal space" just like any other person does.

i'm actually glad our local police have to record. it was very very handy in a case between local policeman and a crazy kid that pretended he had a gun. in the end the cops got off the hook solely because the entire thing was recorded. in my eyes we need this to happen for police protection and protection of the innocent people ....

That's the trial court order. The Judge cited Rice v. Kempker, 374 F.3d 675, 678 (8th Cir. 2004) which was about videotaping an execution, and that decision cited a whole bunch of things you historically can't video as it is - none of which include public actions by police officers in plain/public view on the streets.

(holding that public has no right to videotape Planning Commission meetings that were required to be public);
(holding that the public has no right to videotape trial even when the defendant wishes it to be videotaped);
(“There is a long leap, however, between a public right under the First Amendment to attend trials and a public right under the First Amendment to see a given trial televised.”),
(holding that the press had no right to videotape criminal trials)
(holding that no First Amendment right existed to publish or copy exhibits displayed in court)
(holding that First Amendment right of access does not extend to videotaped deposition testimony of then-President Clinton).

Honestly being on camera isn't a big deal anymore. I'm on camera for almost my entire tour. The only time I take my body cam off is to take a dump or a leak, other than that it's on me all the time. The minute the lights come on, the cruiser's MVR is on. I think a few years ago people thought that aiming a camera at a cop was going to piss them off (which it did many times). Now it's just another camera focusing on me other than the other two that are already on me. As the others have said though...don't think you are going to walk up to me and stick the phone a foot away from my face without some kind of repercussions. Police have "personal space" just like any other person does.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

You should leave it on for visits to the porcelain throne....you know to document record breakers for posterity